Being-Entirely-Flesh. Taking the Body Beyond its Merleau-Pontian Confines in Educational Theory

  • Joris VliegheEmail author
Part of the Phänomenologische Erziehungswissenschaft book series (PHE, volume 8)


In this contribution I take issue with the dominant educational discourse on the role and the meaning of the human body for education, and develop an alternative to this discourse. This dominant view is bound up with Merleau-Ponty’s groundbreaking work on the importance of the lived body. Central to this view is the call to see the body as a forgotten resource of meaning constitution. However, this way of rendering corporeity doesn’t take into account that there are dimensions of the body which are “on the other side” of meaning and that have an intrinsical educational relevance. What we need to take into consideration is the body qua body, in its full “bodiliness”, in its entirely being flesh. I show what such a view entails by focusing on the meaning of laughter in classrooms and repetitive exercise in physical education.


  1. Agamben, Giorgio. 2010. Nudities (D. Kishik and S. Pedatella, Trans.). Stanford (CA): Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Badiou, A., and N. Truong. 2012. In Praise of Love (P. Bush, Trans.). London: Serpent’s Tail.Google Scholar
  3. Barrow, Robin. 2008. Education and the Body. Prologomena. British Journal of Educational Studies 56 (3): 272–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brohm, Jean-Marie. 2006. La tyrannie sportive: théorie critique d’un opium du people. Paris, Beauchesne.Google Scholar
  5. Deacon, Robert. 2006. Michel Foucault on education: a preliminary theoretical overview. South African Journal of Education 26 (2): 177–187.Google Scholar
  6. Descartes, René. 1996. Meditations on first philosophy (J. Cottingham, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Freund, Peter. 1982. The Civilized Body: Social Domination, Control and Health. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Foucault, Michel. 2010. The Birth of Biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1978–1979 (G. Burchell, Trans.). New York: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  9. Gallagher, Shaun. 2005. How the Body Shapes the Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gleyse, Jacques. 1997. L’instrumentalisation du corps. Une archeologie de la rationalization instrumentale du corps, de l’Âge classique à l’époque hypermoderne. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  11. Gordon, Mordechai. 2014. Humor, Laughter and Human Flourishing. A philosophical exploration of the laughing animal. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gruntz-Stoll, J., and B. Rissland, Eds. 2002. Lachen macht Schule. Humor in Erziehung und Unterricht. Bad Heilbrunn: Julius Klinkhardt.Google Scholar
  13. Heidegger, Martin. 1962. Being and Time (J. Macquarrie and E. Robinson, Trans.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  14. Hirst, P., and R.S. Peters. 1970. The logic of education. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  15. Husserl, Edmund.1973. Zur Phänomenologie der Intersubjektivität I (Husserliana XIII). The Hague: Nijhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hogan, Monica. 2006. Making contact: Teaching, Bodies and the Ethics of Multiculturalism, Review of Education, Pedagogy and Cultural Studies 28 (3/4): 355–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Inglis, D., and M. Holmes. 2000. Toiletry Time. Defecation, temporal strategies and the dilemmas of modernity. Time and Society 9 (2/3): 223–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kant, Immanuel. 1982. Ausgewählte Schriften zur Pädagogik und ihrer Begründung. Besorgt von Hans-Hermann Groothoff. Paderborn: Ferdinand Schöningh.Google Scholar
  19. Kirk, David. 1998. Schooling Bodies. School Practice and Public Discourse 1880–1950. London: Leicester University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Lakoff, G., and M. Johnson. 1999. Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  21. Lewis, Tyson. 2009. Discipline-Sovereignty-Education. In A Foucault for the 21st century: Governmentality, biopolitics, and discipline in the new millennium, Eds. S. Binkley and J. Capetilo, 178–187. London: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
  22. McWilliam, Erica. 2000. Stuck in the missionary position? Pedagogy and desire in new times. In Taught Bodies, Eds. C. O’Farrell et al., 27–38. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  23. McWilliam, Erica. 2003. The vulnerable child as a pedagogical subject, Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 19 (2): 35–44.Google Scholar
  24. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1962. Phenomenology of Perception (C. Smith, Trans.). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  25. Merleau-Ponty, M., and C. Lefort, Eds. 1979. Le visible et l’invisible – suivi de notes de travail. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  26. Meyer-Drawe, Käte. 1984. Leiblichkeit und Sozialität. Phänomenologische Beiträge zu einer pädagogischen Theorie der Inter-Subjektivität. München: Fink.Google Scholar
  27. Nancy, Jean-Luc. 2008. Corpus (R. Rand, Trans.). New York: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Patočka, Jan. 1998. Body, Community, Language, World (E. Kohák, Trans.). Ed. James Dodd. Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar
  29. Peters, Michael. 2004. Education and the Philosophy of the Body: Bodies of Knowledge and Knowledges of the Body. In Knowing Bodies, Moving Minds, Ed. Liora Bressler, 13–28. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Plessner, Helmuth. 1961. Lachen und Weinen. Eine Untersuchung nach den Grenzen menschlichen Verhaltens. Bern: Francke.Google Scholar
  31. Pozzer-Ardenghi, L., and W.-M. Roth. 2007. On Performing Concepts during Science Lectures. Science Education 91 (1): 96–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rutschky, Katharina. 1997. Schwarze Pädagogik. Quellen zur Naturgeschichte der bürgerlichen Erziehung. Berlin: Ullstein.Google Scholar
  33. Shapiro, Sherry. 1999. Pedagogy and the Politics of the Body. A Critical Praxis. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
  34. Shusterman, Richard. 2004. Somaesthetics and Education: Exploring the Terrain. In Knowing Bodies, Moving Minds, Ed. Liora Bressler, 51–60. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Theweleit, Klaus. 2005. Männerphantasien 1 + 2. München: Piper.Google Scholar
  36. Vlieghe, J., J. Masschelein, and M. Simons. 2012. Being entirely flesh. A new approach to the educational significance of the body. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik 58 (3): 371–388.Google Scholar
  37. Vlieghe, Joris. 2013a. Experiencing (im)potentiality. Bollnow and Agamben on the educational meaning of school practices. Studies in Philosophy and Education 32 (2): 189–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Vlieghe, Joris. 2013b. Physical Education as ‘means without ends’. Towards a new concept of physical education. Educational Philosophy and Theory 45 (9): 934–948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Vlieghe, Joris. 2014a. Corporeality, equality and education. A biopedagogical perspective. Review of Education, Pedagogy and Cultural Studies 36 (4): 320–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vlieghe, Joris. 2014b. On the other side of meaning. Merleau-Ponty and Agamben on the body and education. Teoría de la Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria 26 (1): 21–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Vlieghe, Joris. 2014c. Laughter as immanent life-affirmation. Reconsidering the educational value of laughter through a Bakthinian lense. Educational Philosophy and Theory 46 (2): 148–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Whitehead, Margaret. 2001. The Concept of Physical Literacy. British Journal of Teaching Physical Education 6 (2): 127–138.Google Scholar
  43. Whitehead, Margaret. 2007. Physical Literacy: Philosophical Considerations in Relation to Developing a Sense of Self, Universality and Propositional Knowledge. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 1 (3): 281–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Catholic University of LeuvenLeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations